Uncertainty and equipoise: At interplay between epistemology, decision making and ethics

American Journal of the Medical Sciences

Volumn 342, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 282-289

  Djulbegovic, Benjamin ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA   (United States)

^b H LEE MOFFITT CANCER CENTER AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

Clinical equipoise; Clinical research; Informed consent; Research ethics

Indexed keywords

ANALYTIC METHOD; ATTITUDE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); COGNITION; CONFERENCE PAPER; EPISTEMOLOGY; EQUIPOISE; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; HARM REDUCTION; HUMAN RELATION; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL ERROR; RESEARCH ETHICS; RISK ASSESSMENT; SCIENCE; TAXONOMY; UNCERTAINTY;

EID: 80053353930     PISSN: 00029629     EISSN: 15382990     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MAJ.0b013e318227e0b8     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (87)

1. Djulbegovic B. Articulating and responding to uncertainties in clinical research. J Med Philos 2007;32:79-98. (Pubitemid 46598161)
2. Emanuel EJ, Wendler D, Grady C. What makes clinical research ethical? JAMA 2000;283:2701-11. (Pubitemid 30337334)
3. Foster C. The ethics of medical research on humans. Cambridge (MA): Cambridge University Press; 2001.
4. Henderson GE, Churchill LR, Davis AM, et al. Clinical trials and medical care: defining the therapeutic misconception. PLoS Med 2007; 4:e324. www.nccn.org.Accessed March 17, 2009
5. Miller FG, Brody H. A critique of clinical equipoise. Therapeutic misconception in the ethics of clinical trials. Hastings Cent Rep 2003; 33:19-28.
6. Miller FG, Rosenstein DL. The therapeutic orientation to clinical trials. N Engl J Med 2003;348:1383-6. (Pubitemid 36384108)
7. Quinn WS. Actions, intentions and consequences: the doctrine of doing and allowing. Philos Rev 1992;101:343-52.
8. Beecher HK. Ethics and clinical research. N Engl J Med 1966;274: 1354-60.
9. Beecher HK. Ethical problems created by the hopelessly unconscious patient. N Engl J Med 1968;278:1425-30.
10. Deyo R, Patrrick D. Hope or hype-the obsession with medical advances and the high cost of false promises. New York (NY): Amacom; 2005.
11. Rettig RA, Jacobson PD, Farquhar CM, et al. False hope. Bone marrow transplantation for breast cancer. New York (NY): Oxford University Press; 2007.
12. Miller FG, Joffe S. Equipoise and the dilemma of randomized clinical trials. N Engl J Med 2011;364:476-80.
13. Djulbegovic B. Acknowledgment of uncertainty: a fundamental means to ensure scientific and ethical validity in clinical research. Curr Oncol Rep 2001;3:389-95.
14. Silverman WA. Gnosis and random allotment. Control Clin Trials 1981;2:161-4. (Pubitemid 11006600)
15. Silverman WA, Chalmers I. Casting and drawing lots: a time-honoured way of dealing with uncertainty and for ensuring fairness. BMJ 2001;323:1467-8. (Pubitemid 34025217)
16. Jonathan ST, Evans BT. Hypothetical thinking. Dual processes in reasoning and judgement. New York (NY): Psychology Press: Taylor and Francis Group; 2007.
17. Kahneman D. Maps of bounded rationality: psychology for behavioral economics. Am Econ Rev 2003;93:1449-75. (Pubitemid 38799544)
18. Slovic P, Finucane ML, Peters E, et al. Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality. Risk Anal 2004;24:311-22. (Pubitemid 38620129)
19. Geere RN. Explaining science: a cognitive approach. Chicago (IL): University of Chicago Press; 1988.
20. Simon HA. A behavioral model of rational choice. Quart J Econ 1955;69:99-118.
21. Simon HA. Information processing models of cognition. Annu Rev Psychol 1979;30:363-96.
22. Reyna VF. Theories of medical decision making and health: an evidence- based approach. Med Decis Making 2008;28:829-33.
23. Djulbegovic B, Hozo I. Health care reform & criteria for rational decision-making; 2010. Available at: http://wwwsmdmorg/newsletter/ spring-2010/#a22. Accessed May 2, 2011.
24. Schwartz B, Ward A, Monterosso J, et al. Maximizing versus satisficing: happiness is a matter of choice. J Pers Soc Psychol 2002; 83:1178-97.
25. Zeelenberg M, Pieters R. A theory of regret regulation 1.0. J Consumer Psychol 2007;17:3-18.
26. Ariely D. Predictably irrational. New York (NY): HarperCollins Publishers; 2008.
27. Djulbegovic B, Hozo I, Greenland S. Uncertainty in clinical medicine. In: Gifford F, editor. Philosophy of medicine (handbook of the philosophy of science). London: Elsevier; 2011.
28. Hastie R, Dawes RM. Rational choice in an uncertain world, 2nd ed. Los Angeles (CA): Sage Publications; 2010.
29. Hajek A. Probability, logic, and probability logic. In: Goble L, editor. The Blackwell guide to philosophical logic. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing; 2001. p. 362-84.
30. Hajek A. Interpretations of Probability; 2007. Available at: http://plato. stanford.edu/entries/probability-interpret/. Accessed July 13, 2011.
31. Shannon CE, Waever W. The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana: The University of Illinois Press; 1962.
32. Djulbegovic B. The paradox of equipoise: the principle that drives and limits therapeutic discoveries in clinical research. Cancer Control 2009; 16:342-7.
33. Djulbegovic B, Lacevic M, Cantor A, et al. The uncertainty principle and industry-sponsored research. Lancet 2000;356:635-8. (Pubitemid 30627590)
34. Edwards SJ, Lilford RJ, Braunholtz DA, et al. Ethical issues in the design and conduct of randomised controlled trials. Health Technol Assess 1998;2:1-132.
35. Veatch RM. The irrelevance of equipoise. J Med Philos 2007;32:167-83. (Pubitemid 46598164)
36. Peto R, Baigent C. Trials: the next 50 years. BMJ 1998;317:1170-1. (Pubitemid 28488502)
37. Lilford RJ, Djulbegovic B. Equipoise and "the uncertainty principle" are not mutually exclusive. BMJ 2001;322:795.
38. Freedman B. Equipoise and the ethics of clinical research. N Engl J Med 1987;317:141-5. (Pubitemid 17092151)
39. Weijer C, Shapiro SH, Cranley K. For and against: clinical equipoise and not the uncertainty principle is the moral underpining of the randomized trial. BMJ 2000;321:756-8.
40. Karlawish JH, Lantos J. Community equipoise and the architecture of clinical research. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 1997;6:385-96. (Pubitemid 127685122)
41. Chalmers I. Academias failure to support systematic reviews. Lancet 2005;365:469. (Pubitemid 40215722)
42. Chalmers I. The scandalous failure of scientists to cumulate scientifically; 2005. Available at: http://www.icml9.org/program/public/ documents/ Chalmers-131528.pdf. Accessed July 13, 2011.
43. Clarke M. Doing new research? Dont forget the old. PLoS Med 2004;1:e35.
44. Clark O, Clark L, Djulbegovic B. Is clinical research still too haphazard? Lancet 2001;358:1648.
45. Chalmers I. The lethal consequences of failing to make use of all relevant evidence about the effects of medical treatments: the need for systematic reviews. In: Rothwell P, editor. Treating individuals: from randomised trials to personalised medicine. London: Lancet; 2007. p. 37-58.
46. Evans I, Thornton H, Chalmers I. Testing treatments: better research for better healthcare. London: British Library; 2006.
47. Djulbegovic B. Principles of research synthesis. In: Perry M, editor. ASCO Educational Session, 39 Annual Meeting. Washington, DC: ASCO; 2003. p. 737-50.
48. Mann H, Djulbegovic B. Choosing a control intervention for a randomized clinical trial. BMC Med Res Methodol 2003;3:7.
49. Chalmers I. What is the prior probability of a proposed new treatment being superior to established treatments? BMJ 1997;314:74-5.
50. Djulbegovic B, Kumar A, Soares HP, et al. Treatment success in cancer: new cancer treatment successes identified in phase 3 randomized controlled trials conducted by the National Cancer Institutesponsored cooperative oncology groups, 1955 to 2006. Arch Intern Med 2008;168:632-42. (Pubitemid 351468398)
51. Rid A, Emanuel EJ, Wendler D. Evaluating the risks of clinical research. JAMA 2010;304:1472-9.
52. Lytsy P, Burell G, Westerling R. Views on treatment necessity, harm, and benefits in patients using statins. Med Decis Making 2010;30:594-609.
53. Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A. Judgement under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. New York (NY): Cambridge University Press; 2005.
54. Kahneman D, Tversky A. "Prospect theory": an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 1979;47:263-91.
55. Kahneman D, Tversky A. The psychology of preferences. Sci Am 1982;246:160-73. (Pubitemid 12178653)
56. Kahneman D, Tversky A. Choices, values, and frames. New York (NY): Cambridge University Press; 2000.
57. Tversky A, Wakker PP. Risk attitudes and decision weights. Econometrica 1995;63:297-323.
58. Birnbaum MH. Paradoxes of Allais, stochastic dominance, and decision weights. In: Shanteau B, Mellers A, Schum DA, editors. Decision science and technology: reflections on the contributions of Ward Edwards Norwell. MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1999. p. 27-52.
59. Birnbaum MH. New paradoxes of risky decision making. Psychol Rev 2008;115:463-501.
60. Tversky A, Kahneman D. Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty. J Risk Uncertainty 1992;5:297-323.
61. Meropol NJ, Weinfurt KP, Burnett CB, et al. Perceptions of patients and physicians regarding phase I cancer clinical trials: implications for physician-patient communication. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:2589-96. (Pubitemid 46606342)
62. Weinfurt KP. Value of high-cost cancer care: a behavioral science perspective. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:223-7. (Pubitemid 350003038)
63. Tversky A, Kahneman D. Judgement under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 1974;185:1124-31.
64. Djulbegovic B, Lyman G. Screening mammography at 40-49 years: regret or regret? Lancet 2006;368:2035-7. (Pubitemid 44855093)
65. Tsalatsanis A, Hozo I, Vickers A, et al. A regret theory approach to decision curve analysis: a novel method for eliciting decision makers preferences and decision-making. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2010; 10:51.
66. McNeil BJ, Pauker SG, Sox HC Jr, et al. On the elicitation of preferences for alternative therapies. N Engl J Med 1982;306:1259-62. (Pubitemid 12100207)
67. Tversky A, Kahneman D. Rational choice and the framing of decisions. J Business 1986;59:5251-78.
68. MacLean D. Informed consent and the construction of values. In: Slovic P, Lichtenstein S, editors. The construction of preference I. New York (NY): Cambridge University Press; 2006. p. 668-82.
69. Lichtenstein S, Slovic P. The construction of preference. New York (NY): Cambridge University Press; 2006.
70. Hozo I, Schell MJ, Djulbegovic B. Decision-making when data and inferences are not conclusive: risk-benefit and acceptable regret approach. Semin Hematol 2008;45:150-9. (Pubitemid 351876120)
71. Djulbegovic B, Hozo I. When should potentially false research findings be considered acceptable? PLoS Med 2007;4:e26.
72. Jacobson PD, Parmet WE. A new era of unapproved drugs: the case of Abigail Alliance v Von Eschenbach. JAMA 2007;297:205-8. (Pubitemid 46089737)
73. Okie S. Access before approval-a right to take experimental drugs? N Engl J Med 2006;355:437-40. (Pubitemid 44162269)
74. Djulbegovic B, Hozo I. At what degree of belief in a research hypothesis is a trial in humans justified? J Eval Clin Practice 2002;8: 269-76. (Pubitemid 34685903)
75. Baron J. Thinking and deciding, 4 ed. Cambridge (MA): Cambridge University Press; 2007.
76. Hozo I, Djulbegovic B. Will insistence on practicing medicine according to expected utility theory lead to an increase in diagnostic testing?. Med Decis Making 2009;29:320-2.
77. De Neys W. Dual processing in reasoning: two systems but one reasoner. Psychol Sci 2006;17:428-33. (Pubitemid 43657918)
78. Weckstein D, Thomas C, Emery IF, et al. The assessment of cost and other barriers to patient clinical trial participation in the community setting. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:6030.
79. Hellman D. Evidence, belief, and action: the failure of equipoise to resolve the ethical tension in the randomized clinical trial. J Law Med Ethics 2002;30:375-80. (Pubitemid 39258072)
80. Hellman S, Hellman DS. Of mice but not men: problems of the randomized clinical trial. N Engl J Med 1991;324:1585-9.
81. Chalmers I. Using systematic reviews and registers of ongoing trials for scientific and ethical trial design, monitoring, and reporting. In: Egger M, Smith GD, Altman DG, editors. Systematic reviews in health care meta-analysis in context. London: BMJ; 2001. p. 429-43.
82. Johnson N, Lilford JR, Brazier W. At what level of collective equipoise does a clinical trial become ethical? J Med Ethics 1991;17:30-4.
83. Djulbegovic B, Bercu B. At what level of collective equipoise does a clinical trial become ethical for the IRB members? In: USF Third National Symposium-bioethical considerations in human subject research; Clearwater, Florida, March 8-10, 2002.
84. Rawls J. A theory of justice. Revised edition. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press; 1999.
85. Daniels N, Sabin JE. Accountability for reasonableness: an update. BMJ 2008;337:a1850.
86. Hammond KR. Human judgment and social policy. Irreducible uncertainty, inevitable error, unavoidable injustice. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1996.
87. Behera M, Kumar A, Soares HP, et al. Evidence-based medicine for rare diseases: implications for data interpretation and clinical trial design. Cancer Control 2007;14:160-6. (Pubitemid 46515152)